This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Fix overzealous folding

From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 09:40:52 -0700
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix overzealous folding
References: <200805161339.28049.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <200805161902.41120.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <84fc9c000805161017o4a0eb158j1a8e1a365c1a2299@mail.gmail.com> <200805162034.17432.ebotcazou@adacore.com>

Eric Botcazou wrote:

The 2 things are clearly not compatible, so one of them needs to be disabled. Since the folding is already disabled for BOOLEAN_TYPE, I think it makes sense to disable it for ENUMERAL_TYPE too. If you think it's better to disable the VRP semantics, then let's disable it.

In C/C++, ENUMERAL_TYPEs and INTEGER_TYPEs are very closely related. I'd be pretty surprised if I writing my code with int-sized enums instead of ints caused different behavior. So, I don't think the patch as written makes sense. But, I haven't understood the whole problem well enough to say anything sensible about where a better fix might lie.

Thanks,

--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Fix overzealous folding
  - From: Eric Botcazou

References:
- [PATCH] Fix overzealous folding
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- Re: [PATCH] Fix overzealous folding
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- Re: [PATCH] Fix overzealous folding
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: [PATCH] Fix overzealous folding
  - From: Eric Botcazou

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]